Government. Centralizing power in government. Government taking away the last check on government. And government tyranny.

There... over three hundred posts in this thread and I believe the answer has finally been reached.

No it hasn't. Centralised government should be used more so that there is no confusion when going from one area to the next. Whether it be about education, guns, driving, building regulations or whatever.
Local government should only be responsible for deciding thing like, should we build the new school here, here or there. Not on what subjects should be taught inside the school.

"This Article challenges the insurrectionist model. The Second Amendment was not enacted to provide a check on government tyranny; rather, it was written to assure the Southern states that Congress would not undermine the slave system by using its newly acquired constitutional authority over the militia to disarm the state militia and thereby destroy the South's principal instrument of slave control. In effect, the Second Amendment supplemented the slavery compromise made at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and obliquely codified in other constitutional provisions.[52]"

An interesting, well researched paper on the true history of the 2nd amendment. Also explains where I.D. is getting his information from.Reality Internet Personality

Like Many have Stated Here, The US Constitution is A Fluid, Changeable In Interpretation, Through Time, Document.

Now, In The 21st Century, We, Certain-Over 50%-of The US Population, Do Believe, Tyranny Is Suspect, And, The Interpretation Now, In Our Time, Of The Second Admendment, Is, One Of An Insurrectionist Nature.

PROFessor S. Say: There It Goes Again, Nature, Evolving, not so much to Make US Better, But To Adapt to CHANGING Environments. he ahe ahe hehe

Like Many have Stated Here, The US Constitution is A Fluid, Changeable In Interpretation, Through Time, Document.

Now, In The 21st Century, We, Certain-Over 50%-of The US Population, Do Believe, Tyranny Is Suspect, And, The Interpretation Now, In Our Time, Of The Second Admendment, Is, One Of An Insurrectionist Nature.

PROFessor S. Say: There It Goes Again, Nature, Evolving, not so much to Make US Better, But To Adapt to CHANGING Environments. he ahe ahe hehe

and who lobbied to change it?

From the paper:
"The bulk of this writing has been produced by a small band of true believers who belong not merely to the individual rights school of thought but a particular wing commonly called "insurrectionist theory."[35] The leader of this band is Stephen P. Halbrook,[36] who, with the support of tens of thousands of dollars in NRA grants,[37] has written no less than two books and thirteen law review articles advocating this particular theory of the Second Amendment.[38] Insurrectionist theory is premised on [Page 319] the idea that the ultimate purpose of an armed citizenry is to be prepared to fight the government itself. Halbrook believes that "the Second Amendment's framers anticipated a force of the whole armed populace, not a select group, to counter inroads on freedom by government,"[39] and that they intended "to guarantee the right of the people to have .their private arms' to prevent tyranny and to overpower an abusive standing army or select militia."[40] Such writings conjure up a romantic image of the colonial militia: rugged individualists who answer to no one but their own conscience and stand ready to protect their homes, families, and communities from all manner of threats, both foreign and domestic. Because they serve no master other than their own sense of patriotism, they cannot be manipulated or commandeered as might a government controlled force. Because they are armed, they have the means, as well as the will, to resist tyranny."Reality Internet Personality